Astrogorgia sinensis (Verrill, 1865)

Muricea sinensis Verrill, 1865: 187, pl. 5, fig. 5&5a (Hong Kong)

Astrogorgia sinensis (new comb.) Verrill 1868: 414 (Hong Kong)

Opinion: There is no evidence that this species occurs in the region.

Justification:

These Indian records seem to be either invalid or unconfirmable: Fernando 2011: 75–76, pl. 50, fig. 1–1d (Cuddalore); Fernando et al. 2017: 164, pl. 75, fig. 1–1d (Cuddalore).

Literature analysis: This species was originally described in 1865 by Verrill for a specimen from Hong Kong and named Muricea sinensis and then later changed by the author in 1868 to Astrogorgia sinensis . Verrill’s description was very short and his illustrations inadequate to characterise the species, as also observed by Goh and Chou (1996) with their tentative identification of material from Singapore. Verrill’s colony was irregularly dichotomously branched and he first stated that the sclerites were small and oblong, but later said they were all long, sharp warty spindles of various sizes. The colony described in the identical accounts by Fernando (2011) and Fernando et al. (2017) appears to be branched laterally to pinnately. It is not possible to accurately identify Verrill’s species as the detail of the sclerites remains unknown.